Christopher J D Wallis1, Mohit Butaney2, Raj Satkunasivam3, Stephen J Freedland4,5, Sandip P Patel6, Omid Hamid7, Sumanta K Pal8, Zachary Klaassen9,10. 1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. School of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. 3. Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Urology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas. 4. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. 5. Urology Section, Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 6. Moores Cancer Center-La Jolla, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla. 7. Translational Research & Immunooncology, The Angeles Clinic & Research Institute, Los Angeles, California. 8. Department of Medical Oncology and Experimental Therapeutics, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California. 9. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta. 10. Georgia Cancer Center, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Sex-associated differences in immune response are known, but a meta-analysis suggested men, compared with women, derive greater value from immunotherapy for advanced solid-organ malignant neoplasms. However, methodologic concerns and subsequent trials have placed these results in doubt. OBJECTIVE: To perform an updated, comprehensive meta-analysis that assesses the efficacy of immunotherapy in advanced cancers according to patient sex. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A systematic review of studies (n = 23) indexed in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and Scopus from inception of these databases to October 2, 2018, was conducted. Randomized clinical trials that compared immunotherapy with standard of care in the treatment of advanced solid-organ malignant neoplasms were included if overall survival was reported as an outcome and if data stratified by patient sex were available. Observational studies, editorials, commentaries, review articles, non-peer-reviewed publications, studies that compared various immunotherapy regimens, studies that reported other measures of oncologic response, and studies that reported subgroup analyses for 1 sex only were excluded. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Overall survival, with a test for heterogeneity between women and men, to assess the null hypothesis that no difference in the survival advantage of immunotherapy exists by patient sex. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 23 randomized clinical trials that reported on 9322 men (67.9%) and 4399 women (32.1%); the age of most patients was in the 70s. An overall survival benefit of immunotherapy was found for both men (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.69-0.81; P < .001) and women (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.88; P = .002). Random-effects meta-analysis of study-level differences in response to immunotherapy demonstrated no statistically significant difference between the sexes (I2 = 38%; P = .60). Subgroup analyses according to disease site, line of therapy, class of immunotherapy, study methodology, and representation of women recapitulated these findings. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Stratified analyses demonstrated no statistically significant association of patient sex with the efficacy of immunotherapy in the treatment of advanced cancers using overall survival as the outcome.
IMPORTANCE: Sex-associated differences in immune response are known, but a meta-analysis suggested men, compared with women, derive greater value from immunotherapy for advanced solid-organ malignant neoplasms. However, methodologic concerns and subsequent trials have placed these results in doubt. OBJECTIVE: To perform an updated, comprehensive meta-analysis that assesses the efficacy of immunotherapy in advanced cancers according to patient sex. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A systematic review of studies (n = 23) indexed in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and Scopus from inception of these databases to October 2, 2018, was conducted. Randomized clinical trials that compared immunotherapy with standard of care in the treatment of advanced solid-organ malignant neoplasms were included if overall survival was reported as an outcome and if data stratified by patient sex were available. Observational studies, editorials, commentaries, review articles, non-peer-reviewed publications, studies that compared various immunotherapy regimens, studies that reported other measures of oncologic response, and studies that reported subgroup analyses for 1 sex only were excluded. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Overall survival, with a test for heterogeneity between women and men, to assess the null hypothesis that no difference in the survival advantage of immunotherapy exists by patient sex. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 23 randomized clinical trials that reported on 9322 men (67.9%) and 4399 women (32.1%); the age of most patients was in the 70s. An overall survival benefit of immunotherapy was found for both men (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.69-0.81; P < .001) and women (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.88; P = .002). Random-effects meta-analysis of study-level differences in response to immunotherapy demonstrated no statistically significant difference between the sexes (I2 = 38%; P = .60). Subgroup analyses according to disease site, line of therapy, class of immunotherapy, study methodology, and representation of women recapitulated these findings. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Stratified analyses demonstrated no statistically significant association of patient sex with the efficacy of immunotherapy in the treatment of advanced cancers using overall survival as the outcome.
Authors: Caroline Robert; Georgina V Long; Benjamin Brady; Caroline Dutriaux; Michele Maio; Laurent Mortier; Jessica C Hassel; Piotr Rutkowski; Catriona McNeil; Ewa Kalinka-Warzocha; Kerry J Savage; Micaela M Hernberg; Celeste Lebbé; Julie Charles; Catalin Mihalcioiu; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Cornelia Mauch; Francesco Cognetti; Ana Arance; Henrik Schmidt; Dirk Schadendorf; Helen Gogas; Lotta Lundgren-Eriksson; Christine Horak; Brian Sharkey; Ian M Waxman; Victoria Atkinson; Paolo A Ascierto Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: F Stephen Hodi; Steven J O'Day; David F McDermott; Robert W Weber; Jeffrey A Sosman; John B Haanen; Rene Gonzalez; Caroline Robert; Dirk Schadendorf; Jessica C Hassel; Wallace Akerley; Alfons J M van den Eertwegh; Jose Lutzky; Paul Lorigan; Julia M Vaubel; Gerald P Linette; David Hogg; Christian H Ottensmeier; Celeste Lebbé; Christian Peschel; Ian Quirt; Joseph I Clark; Jedd D Wolchok; Jeffrey S Weber; Jason Tian; Michael J Yellin; Geoffrey M Nichol; Axel Hoos; Walter J Urba Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-06-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Robert J Motzer; Nizar M Tannir; David F McDermott; Osvaldo Arén Frontera; Bohuslav Melichar; Toni K Choueiri; Elizabeth R Plimack; Philippe Barthélémy; Camillo Porta; Saby George; Thomas Powles; Frede Donskov; Victoria Neiman; Christian K Kollmannsberger; Pamela Salman; Howard Gurney; Robert Hawkins; Alain Ravaud; Marc-Oliver Grimm; Sergio Bracarda; Carlos H Barrios; Yoshihiko Tomita; Daniel Castellano; Brian I Rini; Allen C Chen; Sabeen Mekan; M Brent McHenry; Megan Wind-Rotolo; Justin Doan; Padmanee Sharma; Hans J Hammers; Bernard Escudier Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-03-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Martin Reck; Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu; Andrew G Robinson; Rina Hui; Tibor Csőszi; Andrea Fülöp; Maya Gottfried; Nir Peled; Ali Tafreshi; Sinead Cuffe; Mary O'Brien; Suman Rao; Katsuyuki Hotta; Melanie A Leiby; Gregory M Lubiniecki; Yue Shentu; Reshma Rangwala; Julie R Brahmer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-10-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael B Cook; Sanford M Dawsey; Neal D Freedman; Peter D Inskip; Sara M Wichner; Sabah M Quraishi; Susan S Devesa; Katherine A McGlynn Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2009-03-17 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Scott J Antonia; Augusto Villegas; Davey Daniel; David Vicente; Shuji Murakami; Rina Hui; Takayasu Kurata; Alberto Chiappori; Ki H Lee; Maike de Wit; Byoung C Cho; Maryam Bourhaba; Xavier Quantin; Takaaki Tokito; Tarek Mekhail; David Planchard; Young-Chul Kim; Christos S Karapetis; Sandrine Hiret; Gyula Ostoros; Kaoru Kubota; Jhanelle E Gray; Luis Paz-Ares; Javier de Castro Carpeño; Corinne Faivre-Finn; Martin Reck; Johan Vansteenkiste; David R Spigel; Catherine Wadsworth; Giovanni Melillo; Maria Taboada; Phillip A Dennis; Mustafa Özgüroğlu Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Luis Paz-Ares; Alexander Luft; David Vicente; Ali Tafreshi; Mahmut Gümüş; Julien Mazières; Barbara Hermes; Filiz Çay Şenler; Tibor Csőszi; Andrea Fülöp; Jerónimo Rodríguez-Cid; Jonathan Wilson; Shunichi Sugawara; Terufumi Kato; Ki Hyeong Lee; Ying Cheng; Silvia Novello; Balazs Halmos; Xiaodong Li; Gregory M Lubiniecki; Bilal Piperdi; Dariusz M Kowalski Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Robert J Motzer; Bernard Escudier; David F McDermott; Saby George; Hans J Hammers; Sandhya Srinivas; Scott S Tykodi; Jeffrey A Sosman; Giuseppe Procopio; Elizabeth R Plimack; Daniel Castellano; Toni K Choueiri; Howard Gurney; Frede Donskov; Petri Bono; John Wagstaff; Thomas C Gauler; Takeshi Ueda; Yoshihiko Tomita; Fabio A Schutz; Christian Kollmannsberger; James Larkin; Alain Ravaud; Jason S Simon; Li-An Xu; Ian M Waxman; Padmanee Sharma Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Fabio Conforti; Laura Pala; Vincenzo Bagnardi; Giuseppe Viale; Tommaso De Pas; Eleonora Pagan; Elisabetta Pennacchioli; Emilia Cocorocchio; Pier Francesco Ferrucci; Filippo De Marinis; Richard D Gelber; Aron Goldhirsch Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Narjust Duma; Azzouqa Abdel-Ghani; Siddhartha Yadav; Katherine P Hoversten; Clay T Reed; Andrea N Sitek; Elizabeth Ann L Enninga; Jonas Paludo; Jesus Vera Aguilera; Konstantinos Leventakos; Yanyan Lou; Lisa A Kottschade; Haidong Dong; Aaron S Mansfield; Rami Manochakian; Alex A Adjei; Roxana S Dronca Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-04-29